Such as the right of free speech.

When I see people clamouring about their FreedomTo do X, Y, and Z, I often want to clamour about my own FreedomFrom doing X, Y, and Z to me. Gun control is a good example of the differences in philosophy between those who favour FreedomFrom vs. those who favour FreedomTo.

----

An interesting aspect of this is that a given freedom can be both a "from" and "to" -- like so:
    '''Freedom to''' "keep and bear arms"
    is really a '''freedom from''' unfettered tyranny of government.
Whereas there are many who wish "freedom from guns" along with "freedom to speak freely" there are many who cannot seem to understand that "freedom from guns borne by your neighbors" is only enforceable by "guns in the hands of government" which, historically, has led to "freedom of government to do as it damn well pleases," which results is "freedom of government to restrict one's "freedom to speak."

I'm sure there are other, less polarizing examples, but this is what came first to mind.

Essentially, the '''freedom to''' do [whatever] is predicated on the '''freedom from''' someone else preventing you from doing [whatever].  Freedom to have just redress of wrongs means freedom from capricious judgment.  Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure means freedom to control one's domain -- and in fact ''establishes'' the idea that one even ''has'' a domain.

----
One of the problems that many may have with a topic like this, is that fact that there is a topic like this.  Freedom should be a natural given right, and should never be an "idea" that needs to be discussed.  It implies that one is not owned by one's self.  Makes for creating grouchy dispositions.  Freedom to, and freedom from, are the same. Freedom To, can be used to cover both "right to do" and "protection from" i.e.: The "freedom to" protect one's self "from" one's abuser.

----
CategoryOffTopic